You'd have no problem with caucuses either. If they were beneficial to Hillary, a caucus would be the greatest thing ever. I see through your game of Cowboys and Indians. Your feigned outrage at Wright is measured by how useful it is to Hillary. Period.

Jim and Susan McDougal, Norman Hsu, sweat shop slave master, Peter Paul, international fugitive financier, Charlie Trie, John Huang and on and on. Look, you don't survive in politics as long as they have without rubbing elbows with some unsavory characters.

What you seem to be saying is unsavory characters are fine, as long as they're patriotic and are on Hillary's side.

The idea that Hillary would make a great nominee has a lot of merit. What is absurd is the notion she is somehow cleaner than other candidates.

At no time did he say "I Revereand Wright, hate America". He did however draw a connection between imperialism and what happened on 9-11. I have seen that same connection made here thousands of times over the years and frankly, agree with it.

But can't you see how that same interpretation will be made at FreeRepublic? I'd like to believe DU's worst poster is better than their best poster. I'm more interested in finding meaning on how he came to view the country that way than I am engaging in a knee jerk reaction to what he said.

problem? Truth hurts, is that it? No, we as Amurikins don't see the horrible truths about our power hungry country over the years. And furthermore, if we can find a WalMart and a McDonald's, all's well with our little piece of paradise. And fuck those that can't find their bootstraps. IMHO.

Far from it. But I love it enough to see its flaws. That USED to be the way it was here. Now we're reduced to flag waving and feigning outrage at things that 16 months ago wouldn't have produced a lot of outrage around here. Oh yeah, it must be primary season.

Another one I predicted long before the fall. And I thought it was digusting when people said Andy wasn't really sick. I also hate when people assume just because you haven't posted before that you are new to DU. Not new. Just new to posting. Wasn't everyone at some point?

aren't gonna agree with you. But most of them are only here on temporary assignment...and yes, of course, when DU was really DU, he would be like a Black Noam Chomsky!

Don't let these folks hoodwink you...and understand that this was the home of the brave and the land of the free that made up Wrights impression of America.

Wright was in Richmond Virginia from 1959 to 1961...and then joined up with the Marines. He must of seen quite a bit during those early days which were when the organizing started to come in full force to what would be known some years later as the Civil Rights movement--

He is a brilliant communicator for his circle, but he's not going to pull in many converts that way. It is ironic that many Clinton supporters wanted to blow off Obama because he wasn't a fighter enough. They wanted someone who wouldn't give an inch and wasn't going to "reach out" to Republicans. Now that there is someone in Obama's corner who seems to also share that vision of fighting, they want Obama to disavow him and reaffirm his desire to reach out. They say that Obama isn't liberal enough, but then when it is revealed that his pastor is a Liberation Theologist, he's suddenly too radical.

If OBama is out, McCain is in. Cause Folks all over this nation will be keeping their asses home. Don't think that what Wright said is isolated to one church and to one person, because it ain't. He may have been a over the top fire brimstone in his delivery, but don't believe for one minute that Black folks have been hoodwink into thinking that America is the land of the brave and the home of the free. We know better....which is why we've had to fight for just about everything that we have gotten.

If I were you, I'd chill a bit, before you outsmart yourself.

Oh and by the way, please don't confuse Obama for Wright. They are not the same people....but yet, you appear to making them interchangeable. I realize that they all look alike to you, but they aren't the same people, nor have they had the same experiences.

You're assuming way too much. First, don't tell me I'm fucking with the wrong people or presume to school me. I know wtf I'm talking about; I've been around the political block for too long as an insider and more over the years.

And although I would prefer Hillary, I expect Obama to win the nomination. I just want him to be competitive in November!

It is those of you who think you do Obama any favors by trying to convince people that Wright's views are cool who need to get a clue about who you are fucking with: Obama cannot win without distancing himself from them. It's a fact. Even he knows it, as demonstrated by his actions tonight.

...Interesting. In the decade I've been online, I've put maybe five people total on ignore in a few forums. 2 or 3 of the 5 are here, added when I first joined, just because I wanted to read threads without the endless clutter they created.

33. I voted for Clinton, and there's little I've heard of Wright saying that I didn't agree with to some

extent. He's a preacher, he's supposed to be fiery and rhetorical. This nation's history on race has been and still is atrocious. It is just as bad on gender and sexual orientation--people are still being raped, beaten, and murdered because of racist, sexist, homophobic, and bigoted ideas held by attackers.

I even loved the way Reverend Wright expressed his "God damn America" sentiment--not asking God to damn America, or asking people to sing "God Damn America" as the media has reported, but stating that for specific atrocious acts God has damned America. No big deal to me--my love of my country does not force me to cover for its sins. I love to see them exposed. Cudos to Reverend Wright for doing so.

And I've not condemned Obama once for his association with Wright, and have no intention of doing so, even if it comes out that Obama has expressed agreement with some of his ideals.

Now that I've said all of that, I wonder if you can understand why Clinton supporters are so outraged with Obama and/or Obama supporters when he lies and misrepresents Clinton's views in the same way you are outraged when Clinton supporters do it to Obama. The whole race-baiting bit he pulled over her LBJ comments, for instance, when he clearly understood her. His misrepresentation of her vote on the so-called Iraq War Resolution, claiming she voted for the war when he, unlike many of his supporters, understands the IWR was an attempt to head off Bush's rush to war, and that the invasion would have happened even if the IWR was rejected, as Bush was continuously pointing out. On and on--corporate sponsors, lobbyists, Ferraro, etc.

Obama has been the portrait of disingenuity in this campaign, so I'm not overly bothered (though I am bothered) when Clinton supporters return the favor.

And in just in case you honestly believe Obama doesn't play that way, here's his own admission from the Daily Show that he does: "So we're preparing and one of my staff said, 'The thing you've got to understand is, this isn't on the level.' And I think that really strikes to what people are frustrated with in politics, is that so much of what we talk about, so much of what we say, it's not true, people know it's not true, all the insiders understand that we're just game-playing"

I'm not trying to change your vote, you should make your decisions based on whatever criteria you use, just don't give other people crap for doing the same thing, and stop assuming Obama is some clean campaigner. I've been in and around politics a long time, and he's the dirtiest campaigner I've ever seen in the Democratic Party (except in local races), despite his false image of a new type of politician.

My point was that much of what Wright said I have read on this site before. I happen to think that's a great thing, by the way. DU is a great place to exchange ideas when we're not tearing each other a new a-hole.

I would never presume Obama is any cleaner than Clinton. My hope is that whoever our nominee is will win in the fall. I hope that nominee is Obama, but at the end of the day, all I care about, and all any of us should care about is winning. That's what matters. Period. If it doesn't, we need to take up quilting and assimilate.

34. And the people who said them here would also have trouble getting elected,

Edited on Sat Mar-15-08 03:26 AM by PurityOfEssence

as would those who consorted with them.

You're using a silly yardstick. There are MANY truths that can't be said in public if one wants to get elected. Threading one's way through human hypocrisy while keeping one's idealism intact is the stuff of greatness, and we're shopping for greatness here, not just "gosh, what a smile" and "oooh, hope and change".

Some things you just can't say if you're running for office, no matter how true they are. Why do they hate us? It's not because of our freedoms, it's because we kill their children. Try saying that. Oh, and that religion thing, too, but let's not talk about that except to say that we like them all and they're all without fault. Our foreign policy isn't about nobility, either, it's mostly about securing and increasing profits. Go ahead; say that. All soldiers are sweet, innocent and noble, right? Not a bad apple in the barrel, is there? It goes on and on.

Politicians are held to high (and ridiculous) standards. We owe it to ourselves that ours actually cut the mustard.

My point is that these things have been said before on this board and often met with much agreement. That's all.

Of course there are many truths that can't be spoken on the campaign trail. But unless someone here is named David Axelrod or Mark Penn we can all afford to discuss it in depth in our little arm chair QB kind of way with no real harm done. DU isn't the real world.

59. What we say is one thing; what we defend a candidate or his friends for saying is another

That's my point. Sure, many of us are accepted here for believing and openly saying things that would render us completely unelectable as candidates. That's no excuse for candidates or their associates saying them; it puts us all in jeopardy.

I interpreted his words as someone who was lamenting the state of his country. Something not to be taken literally. Of course, most will be drawn to the knee jerk reaction and take it literally, which is why it is a problem for Obama.

You've been around DU since 2004. But I question how much you've been paying attention. In fact there have been those who support the notion that we as a nation do bear some responsibility when it comes to how muslims view us. That we are not infallible when it comes to foreign policy and at times flirt with imperialism. It has been discussed on DU that white men and large corporations run this country. It has been discussed that many of our own politicians are wholly owned and operated subsidiaries of these companies. These views are DU 101.

Now the Tuskgegee experiment thing is crack pot and I don't agree with Wright there at all. But many of the themes he touched on I do happen to agree with.

I am not interpreting. You've been here at DU a week, unless you are a "reincarnation" of someone who has gotten a pizza delivery. What "time" would Wright have been lauded? I can't imagine a time when God DAMN America would have been cheered.

There's not much interpreting to be had with God DAMN America. Sorry.

I lived in the middle east for many years, as well as Asia and Europe. I understand the issue of how America is viewed abroad better than most.

And I pay attention.

What I don't understand is how God DAMN America fits into a Sunday sermon at a Christian church.

I've been around since March 2003, when the war started. I donated money to Andy Stephenson when he was ill. I've watched as Bev Harris went from hero to villain. I don't always feel the urge to post You can believe that or not, I'm having trouble mustering up the energy to care.

Moving on...

If you haven't seen some of the themes Wright talked in his sermon discussed here, then you haven't been paying attention. To be polite about it.

Look past the GOD DAMN America comment for a second and look at what else he said.

My view is that his meaning was "God Damn You America, look at how fucked up you've become". I didn't take it to mean "God Damn You America, I hope you burn, burn, burn."

Two very different meanings. You have your view, I have mine.

As to when those themes (not including GOD DAMN AMERICA) have been discussed in one form or another -- I'll go conservative and say EVERY FUCKING DAY. DO you realize we have posters here who believe MIHOP and LIHOP and all that tin foil hat weirdo shit? That the GOP brought Wellston'e plane down? What Wright said is small potatoes in the grand scheme.

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.